Bad Requests for PAL

[Scar270]

AMisler, protesting needing to show a PAL for things that don't require it under law, is exactly the action that will prevent having to show one for everything firearm related.

Cat, I don't think the point was that everyone should be upset about this. I think the ones Rocky was referring to laying down, are those who are demanding that he should lie down and take it, and quite complaining. I didn't see you critisizing his choice, so I know I wouldn't lump you in. No more then I would someone who continues to buy guns from someone who wants a PAL just to handle one. I will use my dollars elsewhere, I won't critisize you if you buy a gun from wholesale, or others like it, I respect your choice, and hope you would respect mine not to purchase their, and to explain to people why that is. I apologize if that sounds at all like I'm putting words in Cat or Rocky's mouths.

[Cowtown guy]

Originally Posted by Rocky7

Hi,

I just had an experience with Bass Pro that I wanted to share. I have had the odd request for a PAL when buying reloading components. I don't take it well. The conversation usually goes like this:

"Do you have a PAL?"
"Yes."
"Can I see it?"
"No. And you should not be asking for it. I don't need a PAL to buy (bullets, powder, brass...) I am not going to show it to you. If you insist on this, please call the Manager because I am not going to show it to you."
"OK. I didn't know that you don't need a PAL to buy x."

And so another clerk is educated and another gun owner refuses to yield to the stupidity. It's not a big deal to some but it's a big deal to me. If others don't know this, I am telling you that you do NOT need to produce a PAL to buy reloading components so please don't. Don't yield. If we stand together on these small issues, we can help to undo the damage of years of liberal propaganda.

Here's an email I just got from Bass Pro with my reply below:

On 2012-01-02, at 4:19 PM, Glenn M. Puschner wrote:

Rick,

Let me apologize for what happened to your brother in law yesterday. You and him are correct when you say that you do not require a PAL to purchase reloading components. This does come to a surprise to a lot of gun owners that do shop here and elsewhere. Many times I’ve had customers offer to show their license when buying components. My staff upstairs in hunting try very hard to make sure that we are up to date with the current legislation. Unfortunately sometimes a few things slip through the cracks, this issue being one of them. I can also say the same for the cashiers downstairs. Many of them do not have a background in hunting or shooting, so they must also learn on the fly.
I hope this is a satisfactory answer for you. If you would like you could call me directly to discuss the issue further. I can be reached at 403-xxx-xxxx

Thanks,

Glenn Puschner
Hunting Manager
Calgary,AB

.......
So he politely answers and admits there is sometimes an issue and is willing to try and work with staff to try and fix this. You want a credible answer and he doesn't try to fib his way thru it and say that there is no way it happened.
Fair enough, but it's your job to teach your staff. This was a young lady cashier downstairs. Fix it.
And you answer rudely.
A lot of us are fed up to the gills with dumb gun laws and the last - and I mean last - thing we need are those who hold themselves out as our "friends" piling on more of that liberal gun control crap.
Again, rude.
My brother-in-law made a special detour to your store, at my request, to pick up some bullets that are hard to get here in *, some powder (which you didn't have anyway - R17) and some binos. I have my eye on one of your safes. I'm a gun nut. I spend quite a bit on hunting and shooting stuff that I really don't need and am grateful for an understanding wife.

I appreciate your reply, but I'd rather have heard "this won't happen again" instead of "Oh well, they don't know what they are doing."
And rude again.
I'm not surprised you have customers who offer to show their PALs. So many gun owners have been whipped for so long, it's a wonder some don't offer to drop their pants. That's no excuse for you or your staff, though, is it?
Need I say it again?
Thanks again for taking the time to reply.

Sincerely,

Rick

ps: I am copying this to my brother-in-law who did me the favour of driving to your store and was frustrated by someone who was inventing laws that don't exist.
Who cares?
We have to take our small victories where we can find them.

Good for you! A small victory indeed. What more could you have asked for? You voiced your opinion, you elicited a response. It was polite and to the point.

Have you ever tried to teach an 18 year old kid anything? Retention for most of them is minimal. Sorry to the young folks but that is the norm. Add to that the fact that She probably isn't a shooter. There are a bunch of new cashiers and most don't know the difference between a bullet or a cartridge. She made a mistake. Deal with it.

Better yet, take on a part time job at a store like this for a few weeks just for kicks and giggles and see what those kids have to put up with.

I had to step in and ask a customer to stop swearing and yelling at one of the kids at the gun counter in Bass Pro last week. He was loudly swearing at him for not having something in stock. These people repeatedly get abused weekly by guys that feel they need to educate staff and voice their opinion.

Hope it makes these guys feel good to b*tch out a teenager! Reeealll manly. I have no issue with someone politely stating that the PAL isn't needed for components. But really was the response to the e-mail that was sent to you really called for?

[Scar270]

gitrdone, those vacation spots you talk about are hardly bastions of freedom. Just because guns are more readily available does not make them free. We have much more freedom here, but a lot of that is because people here won't stand for crap like treating women as property, beating people up for their sexual orientation etc. How come it is when we protest being singled out for firearms ownership, suddenly you lump us in with those who do the above?

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, if gun owners hadn't been so accepting of gun control all along the way, we may not be at this point. The first time gun owners finally started to stand up and say something in a big way was when bill C-68 was introduced. If we had started to have the voice we have now, back in 79 when the FAC's came in, or back in the 60's when handguns were further restricted, we would have never seen the idiocy that was C-68.

Remember it was just a little over 30 years ago you didn't have to show any kind of a license to purchase a rifle, now you feel it's great that you have to show one just to handle an unloaded gun in a store?

It's by letting things slide a little by little that we got where we are, some of us have decided enough is enough, and we are not going to take anything at all lying down. So we write letters about biased news articles, we support business's that do not add any more regulation then absolutely necessary. We send money to those fighting court cases. Then to top it off we try to educate the people who seem to feel gun laws are great and necessary things. It's just sad when we have to spend so much time trying to point it out on a forum like this one.

[Lonnie]

Originally Posted by Scar270

gitrdone, those vacation spots you talk about are hardly bastions of freedom. Just because guns are more readily available does not make them free. We have much more freedom here, but a lot of that is because people here won't stand for crap like treating women as property, beating people up for their sexual orientation etc. How come it is when we protest being singled out for firearms ownership, suddenly you lump us in with those who do the above?

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, if gun owners hadn't been so accepting of gun control all along the way, we may not be at this point. The first time gun owners finally started to stand up and say something in a big way was when bill C-68 was introduced. If we had started to have the voice we have now, back in 79 when the FAC's came in, or back in the 60's when handguns were further restricted, we would have never seen the idiocy that was C-68.

Remember it was just a little over 30 years ago you didn't have to show any kind of a license to purchase a rifle, now you feel it's great that you have to show one just to handle an unloaded gun in a store?

It's by letting things slide a little by little that we got where we are, some of us have decided enough is enough, and we are not going to take anything at all lying down. So we write letters about biased news articles, we support business's that do not add any more regulation then absolutely necessary. We send money to those fighting court cases. Then to top it off we try to educate the people who seem to feel gun laws are great and necessary things. It's just sad when we have to spend so much time trying to point it out on a forum like this one.

what wuold you expect as most on here were either kids on not even born 30yrs. ago when we started getting hammered with these gun laws. and the ones who remember the days of not needing a license for any thing except a hunting licence don't bother to much with computers.

[Lonnie]

Originally Posted by gopher

Chapters , Walt Disney , Toysrus , Star Bucks , Formerly Cooper Rifles. Are all against firearms

you can add canadian tire to that list as well my dad still will not deal there as they were realy in the spot light as pushing to ban guns and were the first to have nothing to do with firearms now there are a few starting to sell firearms again not sure about how this came about but they were totally against firearms.

[leeaspell]

Not sure if it has been said as i dont feel like reading 3 pages of bitchimg and moaning.

If you go to buy ammo or a firearm where they are supposed to ask and theu dont. Do you kick up the same stink?

instead of emailing bps guy why mot email your mp and tell them the stupidity that is going on with the gun laws that are there to protect the average person, who we have met, that has no idea of what the actuall law is. Educate not hate.

Geez pizz all over someone who thaugt they were doing wats right. Guess you have never been wrong on something before. Lets bow down and show our respect to the almighty

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Lonnie

you can add canadian tire to that list as well my dad still will not deal there as they were realy in the spot light as pushing to ban guns and were the first to have nothing to do with firearms now there are a few starting to sell firearms again not sure about how this came about but they were totally against firearms.

Canadian Tire stores are privately owned franchises, so it is up to the owner of they want to sell a particular product.
One store down south even had some high end European rifles in its store!
Cat

[Rocky7]

Originally Posted by Cowtown guy

I have no issue with someone politely stating ....But really was the response to the e-mail that was sent to you really called for?

Luckily, I don't need your permission nor your grammar lesson.

If you were as assiduous in upholding our collective freedoms and resisting politically correct extensions to gun control law as you are in defending store owners and dissecting my grammar, I expect by now we'd be trading comments on who is going to be hunting what with a handgun next fall and who isn't.

[KegRiver]

Well if nothing else, I wager that this thread has been a bit of a shock to some gun owners.

Our local firearms training officer, was very specific about the need to show ones PAL when purchasing any ammo or reloading components.
Seems it is not just some stores that don't know this is not a requirement.


I always believe it was.
I suppose I should have read every word of every piece of paper the Firearms Center every sent me or made available to me, but I didn't.

In fact I often don't read everything anyone ever puts in my hands. If I did I would have no time to do anything else.

Thanks for the heads up.

[Rocky7]

It looks to me like two groups in society have been particularly successful in standing up for and advancing their claimed rights - homosexuals and feminists. Neither of them have been willing to "go along to get along". It has worked for them.

On the other hand, the accommodating, inoffensive approach of gun owners generally hasn't. Yes, we look forward to getting rid of the LGR, but that's hardly enough is it? And how did we end up there in the first place? We can be happy about this victory but there is a war going on and we'd best be paying attention. It's not over.

So, if you truly believe that we have right to do whatever we want right up to the part where somebody else is getting hurt, then we have a right to own guns. The onus of proof in restricting guns must therefore belong to those who do the restricting. I, as a gun owner, don't need to prove anything. If I want one, I have the right to have one - or ten - if I please. (remember that freedom thing?)

Gun ownership, including handguns, has never been proved to have a net overall negative effect on anything, anywhere. Including crime and safety. That's why I resist any extension of our inane gun control laws and I object to any business who is part of the anti-gun propaganda effort and let them know it. I've already explained that.

I wonder if we need more homosexual and female gun owners to make any lasting, real progress or to stave off the inevitable assaults on our rights that are in the wings? I don't support their ideologies but least they are willing to draw a hard line and have the balls for a fight. So to speak.

[shortaction]

I can understand someone disagreeing with the intensity the OP used in his response but I can't understand your acceptance of the stores training their staff to ask for a PAL to purchases something that doesn't require it? Where would you draw the line?

If you where purchasing a camo shirt and they asked for it would you still show your PAL, after all it must be for hunting! I am just saying that there must be a line for everyone, and I'm not sure why it isn't where the law states it is!

These big box stores are fully computerized and there is no reason they wouldn't have the appropriate items flagged as requiring a PAL for purchase. The only reason it isn't done as there hasn't been enough pressure put on them to get it right!

I will not show my PAL for anything that doesn't require it by law, but to each their own! I do not disagree with a store asking for my PAL to handle a firearm as you need one to possess a firearm and as soon as they pass you that firearm to you, I would consider it to be in my possession.

My personal preference is to educate not berate, but I would take berate over submission.

[Scar270]

Shortaction you dont need a PAL if you are under immediate supervision. If I'm in a store I would say that I'm under supervision.

If you are ok with the practice that is your choice, but the law certainly does not demand it. Only store policy.

[Rocky7]

I can see someone seeing "intensity" in my response, I guess. I don't want to get further into the background because this is not about me defending my exact language in the circumstances. Neither is it about personalities.

I note that some were not aware that a PAL does not have to be produced to purchase reloading components and my/our time was well spent in clarifying that, if nothing else.

I have also been noting the feedback from others who posted the names of businesses that contribute to the headwind and I appreciate that. I will decide, as circumstances require, how to deal with that but whatever I do, I will not be a party to it nor patronize a business that supports the ideology of my opponents.

[nekred]

I understand the feeling of the OP...

If it is not required by law... or even in this case by store policy and is a mistake that ended up in the hands of a cashier through ignorance, or carelessness that has shown to be dealt with by the stores management.

There are some interesting points brought up here... We complain about the laws and regulations that make life inconvenient, onerous, or remove what we see as our freedoms.

If we look at the laws implemented and revised in parliament today they are all the result of some type of civil disobedience such as, Hutterites not having their picture raken for driver's license, people lobbying to wear hijabs, or not showing their face for a drivers license photo, or court appearance either!...etc. because they feel it is an infringement on their freedom of religion. Many people on here that complain about the giun registry meanwhile support the laws requiring these people to show their face... because it does not bother us.

Tolerance is the path to having our freedoms impinged upon.

After the the engineering school massacre there was a change in law brought in by Kim Campbell that limited certain rifles and magazine amounts and a few people complained but overall there was no action. So then Allan Rock decided to go one step further and be a hero and went a great many steps further with C-68... and that finally crossed the line of tolerance into the land of indignance and caused civil disobedience with many people refusing to register their guns, and caused the various lobby groups to step up and form against gun registration and finally after wasting billions of our dollars (1 billion is the equivalent of every person in canada spending 300 dollars) because we finally decided we were not going to tolerate the infringement of our freedoms any further...

Canadians are known worldwide for being a tolerant country, Tolerance is a very dangerous thing. Indifference is different than tolerance. indifference is when a decision does not affect us or matter to us. Tolerance is when we choose to accept a negative consequence because to do otherwise would create uncomfort, conflict and requires effort.

Not long ago someone who fought for us against gun control was applauded here on the AO for having the cjones to stand up for us and go to Ottowa to make sure that the ludicrous gun registry disappears.

The OP here saw a situation and did what he could to educate and correct the situation by taking action.

In my opinion there has been assumptions made.

What I choose to take home is that I am glad that there are people choosing not to tolerate further unnecessary infringements on our rights and freedoms.

I love the quote, "For evil to prevail all it requires is that goos people do nothing"...

When I buy reloading supplies and people ask for my PAL I ask is it for law or for store policy. If they say law I explain that the law does not require it and I explain that I am refusing because it is not required by law and ask to speak with manager.

If they say it is store policy, then I explain that under PIPEDA that they require my written consent to access personal information such as drivers' license, SIN, or other unique identifier number or government issued licensing or cards. This act also requires for the company to disclose how they will use this information and the purposes it is collected for to determine if there is a bona fid requirement for this inforation in order for store to be in regulatory compliance...

Yes this does take time, effort and energy, but if I just leave my stuff on the counter and walk away and go to another store that does not do much to change store policy. All that happens is that the cashier or other low level peon ends up having to put the stuff away.

Stores do not collect information on how many people are walking out without making a purchase, and by the time the corporate management notices things it is on the quarterly balance sheet and the damage has long been done....

So the fact the OP took the effort to do their best to make difference, wrote a letter, come on here and posted the results along with their frustrations... then I see the East German style judges sitting behind screens and keyboards making assumptions and judgement calls.

In the end who do we want on our side... the ones willing to take action or those who sit back in the weeds and judge the actions of others while being inactive themselves.

Suggestions can be made on how to make this action more effective, and encourage people to be vigilant and diligent.

Things happened with gun registry once enough of us got fed up with what was happening and suddenly we have a voice.

When I had to sign the book at XXX for powder the counter person turned away to get it and Santa Claus boght a pound of IMR 4350 that day... Address was North Pole, Canada H0H 0H0. That was my act of civil disobedience... the counter person did not need any more educating as he showed me the book and said he would get my powder as I wrote the information in....

He tolerated my act of civil disobedience... because he was in agreement.

Being a cashier in s porting goods store would be a version of hell for me. I have a hard enough time at the self checkout in a grocery store getting the fricken scanner to work, then I place the items in the wrong spot... These cashiers need to know how to run the till, make sure nothing is missed, and then on top of it know what requires a Pal, what doesn't etc. all for minimum wage. On top of it all dealing with a bunch of redneck outdoorsmen who are all very particular or fussy...

So the letter after the fact to the manager of the store was a good move... put the focus on where it needed to be. On the policy makers...

Cheers!

[savage shooter]

An elderly cashier at WSS North Edm who was having trouble signing into her till and obviously shouldn't have been left alone at that point asked me for a PAL for some 50gr ballistic tips. This was after she had to yell over to the customer service counter for help in signing in. (great training)

I told her politely that I didn't believe a PAL was needed for components, only for complete ammunition. She took my word for it.

No problem.

[303carbine]

I show my PAL when and where it's required, not any other time. Store employees should have knowledge of the PAL requirement and when it applies to sale and when it doesn't.

[Bradleytank]

Originally Posted by Scar270

Shortaction you dont need a PAL if you are under immediate supervision. If I'm in a store I would say that I'm under supervision.

If you are ok with the practice that is your choice, but the law certainly does not demand it. Only store policy.

Direct and immediate supervision can be difined different ways however; to myself that means within arms reach so that if you mis handle the firearm I can reach out and correct that. As an associate hands a firearm across a counter there is now a barrier between the Associate and the customer. If the customer then takes a step back to view the firearm in better lighting (happens alot the lights at bass pro are terrible). This can be viewed that the associate has now broken the law.

Secondly it's store policy to view a PAL at bass pro before you handle a firearm. This is to prevent the above mentioned situation as well as to prevent aimless tire kickers. The associate isn't going to break store policy and possible face discipline because you feel you don't have to show your license.

As for the asking for the PAL to buy reloading components yes it's not required, no the associate shouldn't ask if they are paying attention. Saying that when I was working behind the gun counter I asked sometimes because I wasn't paying attention. I usually caught myself before the customer showed me and appoligized saying I didn't need to see it.

The learning curve for the cashiers in a outdoor store like bass pro is steep for the younger kids having their first jobs. It is a training issue they do need to point this out to the new cashiers but also remember that the cashier may have never seen reloading components until that week or day sometimes. If you're polite and tell them that it's not required for components that goes a long way in educating that person.

Good on you for emailing the manager, the only way to provoke change is to voice your concerns. You were polite and respectful as was Glenn's reply. Then it seemed to go down hill from there. I don't honestly expect every person to be 100% every time. Some people don't know the law, some people don't care to learn the law, and finally some people just have an off day. It happens it's how you deal with it that changes the way people act in the future both in the situation and with yourself.


Cheers,

Brad

[Rocky7]

Originally Posted by nekred

.... there was a change in law brought in by Kim Campbell that limited certain rifles and magazine amounts and a few people complained but overall there was no action. So then Allan Rock decided to go one step further and be a hero and went a great many steps further with C-68...

For a lot of years I thought the NRA was a bunch of unreasonable, rigid, stubborn ideologues. I didn't understand why they put up a big fuss about a law to ban an AK-47. Or other "assault rifles". I mean: "What the he!! is wrong those people? Who cares? What's wrong with a bolt action for hunting? Can't they just give a little? So what if magazines are shortened - we can still hunt and if I need all those rounds to shoot an animal, I should be taking up golf. Let's get along here."

Time passed. Sh-t happened.

Now, I'm a proud NRA member - along with memberships on this side of the border. Turns out the NRA was right all along. We can't give an inch. Accommodation, appeasement and compromise all lead to more and more restrictions. Eventually accommodation, appeasement and compromise will lead to confiscation. There's no doubt about that if you take time to do some diligent research.

Not....one....inch. Not because I'm an ideologue or a tough guy or a grouch; but because that's how it has to be.

[Scar270]

As you say Bradley, the law can be interpreted different ways. I have never seen a ruling on what exactly that supervision means.

As far as store policy, you are right, and I do not expect the associate to break store policy. I do not give the associates a bad time over it either. I do choose to take my business somewhere else. If these box stores are so busy they can't take the time to deal with a tire kicker who doesn't have a PAL, well then I guess my taking my business elsewhere isn't going to hurt them, but it might keep the guy who treats me well in business.

[nekred]

There is a reason for my motto in my signature!....

this issue is much bigger than guns!...

Years ago in my past life i recieved a briefing document... it was what we were to do in the event of an insurrection. This is when we had the native blockades and uprisings in various areas in canada, and the realisation of the governemnt at that time was that the deficit could nt continue and that canada's standard of living would drop drasyically because a few countries went through an econmoic crisis...(New Zealand for example)... The fear was that there would be wide spread indiganation among the general populace and because they were armed it made it that much more easy for an insurrection. There actually was another part of Bill c-68 which was even more scary was that it gave UN authority to search and seize fire arms in the event that Martial Law was invoked. This was after the Red threat had disappeared, and before Terrorism and Global warming became the new bogey men and so the general population would actually notice what was happening internally.

We still have our standard of living... we just have used credit to maintain it!... and now the rest of the world is not as econmically secure as us... not because of our banking system but because of the reserves of natural resources we have. Canada is a good investment in an failure of manufacturing and trade based economies as we are a resource based economy. Trade moves resources, manufacturing modifies, or changes them into something else, but more resources are not being made so the country with the most resources is also most economically stable. But in event od worldwide breaksdown where there is possibility of conquest these are also the first targets for invasion which is really armed robbery writ large....

Of course I define international relations as one country screwing another... and like that there is willing and unwilling relations, and beneficial and non-beneficial relations... The worst wars are fought between the largest trading partners.... Who was the Soviets largest trading partner before and after WW2...and who was Germany's.... In World War 1 who was Britain and Germany's largest trding partners, Germany, Britain, France, Who was Japan's largest trading partner before World war 2... China and British Europen controled SE Asia...

Whi is Canada and USA's largest traading partner and Foreign Investor right now other than each other....CHINA....

We are very fortunate to live in this country, and going back to 1990 there was huge fear in the governemnt and Canada was going through a period of unrest with the threat of Quebec separting and...revolution so when the question was aksed how many firearms the average person in Canada had a few surveys were conducted through sales records with introduction of FAC years ago... and governemnt found a nasty surprise... we had an armed populace... then when a deranged individual created a massacre it created an opportunity for the government to motivate populace by fear and blame access to firearms... and it started the ball rolling...

A few saw the original Bill C-68 and they realised what was the intent. Allan Rock was cornered in a press conference and admitted that the fear of insurrection was the trigger for gun control and because we do not have right to be armed enshrined in our charter of rights and freedoms we need to be ever more diligent.

We all know how well the media can educate people. People see an opinion on the news and take it as fact.... SPIN is everything. So it is our duty to educate ourselves, our children and those we deal with every day to make sure our rights are maintained.

Tolerance is what allowed the Holocaust... follwoing orders was not an excuse, turning a blind eye or plausible deniability are not acceptable defenses eanymore because they are classed as negligence. Negligence is simply the absence of diligence. So we need to maintain diligence... before the attack.

In war when everything is good it means you are ripe for an ambush. gun control advocates are going to keep lobbying governement but realise they need to get into media spotlight more, and more involved in our day to day life... through outdoor retail outlets, and other day to day aspects of our lives and they will win one small victiry at a time... today we don;t need to show PAL for reloading equipment, but stores are startong to ask until we respond with a NO.

One great example of this is the misunderstanding on gun safes... everyone beleives they need a gun safe in order to have secure firearm storage. Why would retail outlets try to inform their customers accrodingly when they can sell you a safe worth a few thousand dollars!... Where is the upside for them... they can make $2000 in revenue, or squat... So because jimmy bought a safe he tells johnny you need to have one of these or you will be in trouble... johnny says no i don't... jimmy says well the dude behind the counter at the gun store said i needed one and he heard it from bob the law enforcement officer that it is required... then it becomes a "fact".

We need to be diligent and educate ourselves and others.... continuously... Every time we just pony up and do what the man wants the man wins...

or we can be the Man!

[Lefty-Canuck]

I agree sometimes we have to drink the kool-aid (that the NRA offers, it is tasty )and wake up......if all you do is sit down or kneel then you can't whine when a change happens that you said nothing against.

I get why you did what you did....IMHO I would have done the same thing just in a bit different tone...but thats just me

LC

[catnthehat]

This stuff sytarted long before Bill C68, anyone rememvber Bill C195 that we got squashed in the 60's?
Cat

[nekred]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

This stuff sytarted long before Bill C68, anyone rememvber Bill C195 that we got squashed in the 60's?
Cat

That was before my time... what was the gist of that one?

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by nekred

That was before my time... what was the gist of that one?

It would have made carbines like the tapper secial and the 600 Mohawk illegal based on barel length only , as well as some other equally idiotic rules.
Cat

[nekred]

WOW! all I can say is good thing we had some anti-stupidity actvists then to protect our future!...

[dgl1948]

nekred and Rocky7, if our paths ever cross i will buy the beer.

[Rocky7]

Originally Posted by dgl1948

nekred and Rocky7, if our paths ever cross i will buy the beer.

I appreciate the sentiment, but nekred'll have to drink mine. I drank my share long ago.

[nekred]

Cool and I will buy next round and dgl will have to drink rocky7's

[Cowtown guy]

Originally Posted by Rocky7

Luckily, I don't need your permission nor your grammar lesson.

If you were as assiduous in upholding our collective freedoms and resisting politically correct extensions to gun control law as you are in defending store owners and dissecting my grammar, I expect by now we'd be trading comments on who is going to be hunting what with a handgun next fall and who isn't.

Never said anything about your grammar. Could care less about it actually.

I agree that something needs to be said. It was and rightfully so. After the manager sent a nice and polite letter I would have thanked him for the reply and maybe asked to ensure that the training was instated.

You on the other hand took the internet tough guy route and got rude about the whole ordeal. That is what I take issue with.

The fact of the matter is that 99% of managers out there would have completely avoided the issue and wrote you off as another pushy arrogant customer and ignored you. He didn't. That should be noted. Like I said before, try to work a counter like that for a couple weeks and you would have a whole new appreciation for what happens with so many customers.

[Cowtown guy]

Originally Posted by Scar270

As you say Bradley, the law can be interpreted different ways. I have never seen a ruling on what exactly that supervision means.I had a guy take the gun for a walk last week. He literally grabbed it and started walking away towards the railing. How does that fall into the ruling?

As far as store policy, you are right, and I do not expect the associate to break store policy. I do not give the associates a bad time over it either. I do choose to take my business somewhere else. If these box stores are so busy they can't take the time to deal with a tire kicker who doesn't have a PAL, well then I guess my taking my business elsewhere isn't going to hurt them, but it might keep the guy who treats me well in business.

Keep in mind that at times there can be 40 or 50 people standing at that counter. This keeps the tire kickers away so guys like you can get up and have a look at what you came for. There are all kinds of folks that just want to hold a gun because they play tour of duty on play station. By asking them for a PAL that gets eliminated. It helps everyone that way.